Quality Assurance in Requirements Engineering: Review of Needs and Requirements wording
Publish date: 2010-12-31
Report number: FOI-R--3070--SE
Pages: 48
Written in: Swedish
Keywords:
- Quality assurance
- requirements engineering
- needs
- requirements
- inspection
- systems development
Abstract
In order to succeed in systems development, it must be considered necessary to have a sufficient requirements specification. However, many system specifications contain flaws which could have been avoided with structured methods and more accuracy during the performance. This report presents a method for formulation, review and quality assurance of needs and requirements. The method involves four steps: (1) Formulate needs, (2) Review: Are the needs described in the correct form, (3) Formulate requirements and (4) Review: Are the requirements described in the correct form. The development of the method is based on a literature review. Step 1 and 3 describes how needs and requirements are formulated based on attributes, which serve to make the needs and requirements complete. These needs and requirements are compiled in a Needs table and in a Requirements table. Step 2 and 4 includes a procedure designed to review needs and requirements formulations, in a structured manner based on the usage of several criteria. For this procedure checklists and guidelines have been designed as support. The guidelines as well as the checklists do not require any specific previous knowledge in regards to those performing the review. An initial evaluation of the third step of the method has been carried out. An existing requirements specification was revised according to the method. The revised requirements specification along with the original specification was distributed to ten researchers as well as practitioners, with varying experience of systems development. Their task was to compare the specifications and comment on the material. Respondents acknowledged the revised requirements specification as better formulated, more structured, clearer and also test- and verifiable. The respondents did however consider the requirements to be too specific and therefore only creating limited understanding of the system to develop.